1) China. Yes, it was an apology. Or a statement of regret their man died, not that we shouldn't have landed there or that they didn't cause the accident. The whole world knows we were dealing with unreasonable nuts as well. And you didn't address my point about getting our guys back. We don't have a time machine to use to go back and ditch, we had to address the problem that existed.

2) Columbine etc: Talking to kids will not save them because kids are teased and scared all the time (*I* was for years, and I only got attacked once and it wasn't serious) and no one knows when it will turn deadly. Many of these shootings came from nowhere, good kid, etc. That's what I meant; the response isn't off base.

3) So you visited Hiroshima. Does this negate what I said? And, its a matter of dispute whether Hiroshima and Nagasaki are counter-examples. That renders the meaning of your statement about saving them from Russia questionable. My point is the probably saved themselves without the help of our bomb.

NY'er and Civ biased? Fine, but I said this would be a COUNTER rant (and it'd be a plus to read articles before dismissing them offhand). It's not top secret that this site has a slant of its own.

Yes I'm upset about adding insult to injury merely to test the power of a weapon. Our gov't voted that idea down as cruel--are you saying we should have gone for it? And yes you'd be upset if your family members were nuked. You wouldn't chalk it up to the nature of war. And having nasty opponents in the Japanese military doesn't make civilian victims any more deserving of a nuclear fire.

4) Great that you know about the acre. Kinda irrelevant if only one in a thousand could join you, you have to admit. I'm sure the US is right about our archaic and memorization requiring system and the rest of the entire world is wrong. MY educational goal has always been learning to think and learning essentials, not packing away trivia when they could be looked up or when a better substitute exists. Try this: name one advantage of the English system.

5) Immigrants MAY learn the language... now it's mandatory? I don't follow. I think if someone is going to complain about getting service in another language they should stick to english speaking areas. It's a free country. Spanish speaking communities do fine. Why waste time griping about their language?

6) I'm glad you're laughing your a$$ off about the hectare thing. Maybe before you jump the gun you should wonder if it's a point about interconvertability or not. But nevermind. Your youthful, indoctrinated friend with the meaningless college degree is busy laughing his a$$ off about your supposed policy re: making it personal. LOL. Whew, that was a good one. Maybe I'll get more respect in 13 days.

7) Instincts are useful when making a split second decision... but they're generally nonsense when applied casually to diet or almost anything else. Hey, man has an instinct to fight. Doesn't make it right. Does make for an absurd argument about eating meat.

1) Penis envy. I guess they should change it from "PC" to "empathy." I doubt this is a welcoming thing for any women to see on a forum. It's insulting to their whole gender. And if PC means less fun joking because one takes account of this, maybe it's not the end of the world.

2) I defer to climatologists for further discussion of global warming. I figure they have their reasons and they know more about it than I.

3) I don't watch the visual toilet. How's this: "And especially don't point something that looks like a gun at them." Here's good advice, indeed. But to characterize the kids who walk by the wrong place with a supersoaker or a milky way as a bunch of whiners... or to second guess their split second reaction when they hear a command from someone who could be anyone.. well I don't think that's right. They got shot out of bad luck. Even if all the cops were perfect citizens, I don't think we need to imply the victim was to blame.

4) Gore basically lost the election (and I didn't say he didn't) because a bunch of people voted for buchanan or voted twice and were uncounted or voted for him accidentally and voided their ballots not knowing they could get another. The votes he lost would have put him as the winner by a clear margin. This is what I'm talking about. Not the count. WHICH votes were counted. We have to go by the legitimate votes in the end. But we don't have to pretend that Bush would have won under a system that recorded voter intent with perfect fidelity.

Have you heard that when you assume, you make an @$$ out of U and ME? I never said I wanted Gore to be president. He's not my socialist, utopian leader. I never gave indication he was.

Having a person survive a crash unharmed is better than ANYONE, the person, family, church, insurance whoever paying for a lifetime of care. IMHO. Sure we can blame the victim if he's paralysed and didn't get insurance. We still have to deal with the situation. Our country has set up a system of benefits and made a lot of investments for the automobile driver. To utilize them I say people should be asked to use them responsibly and not burden the system with the results of their stupidity. You've got to have car insurance, a maintained car, proof that you can drive semi-well (a license), so you pose less of a threat. I would add a seatbelt on, or helmet, so you pose less of a financial threat.

Kids die when their parents don't belt them. Other people die when cars or buses fly where guard rails could have prevented them from flying. Where does all this fascination with personal responsibility get us when the person in question was in the back of a bus that rolled (any recent events come to mind, maybe in Canada?*) or is a mushed up kid with a stupid parent?

Broken bodies are more important than ideology at that point. Much as I trust that the right to drive unfettered is vital to our liberty... belt laws make sense.

*in Canada the situation with the rolled bus, I understand, is that the curve was too sharp and this bus was only the latest vehicle to roll there. The parallel is, we can always say all these people drove too fast and therefore got hurt or died thru their own fault. I'd rather say we built a good road (gentle curve or guardrail) and never had to say it was their fault.

And you didn't address my point about getting our guys back.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

yes, I did... You just didn't read it or understand it or missed it or something... In response to your query about whether we should have left our people there or not, I wrote: "Yep. That's their job and they know it. I know it sounds cold..."

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

Columbine etc: Talking to kids will not save them ... (snip) That's what I meant; the response isn't off base.

Yes, it is. You brought up Columbine, not me. The original point was (and is) that parents need to turn off the TV and talk with their kids... get involved with their lives... find out what is going on. Do you really have such a problem with that concept?

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

So you visited Hiroshima. Does this negate what I said?

Nope. It was to point out to you that I have a first-hand understanding of the horrors of what getting nuked are. It was a response to your comments about the poisoning, firestorm and radiation effects... to let you know that I understand those effects.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

And, its a matter of dispute whether Hiroshima and Nagasaki are counter-examples.

Thank you. We agree... You originally wrote "has been demonstrated NOT to end wars"... At least now you admit that fact is in dispute. Which was my basic point.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

That renders the meaning of your statement about saving them from Russia questionable.

Wanna read that one again? You're the one that brought up the Russia connection, not me. I simply used your assertion to point out that sword is double-edged...

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

My point is the probably saved themselves without the help of our bomb.

Then why didn't you write that? You wrote: "...the russians poised to invade resulting in destruction of the japanese culture..."

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

NY'er and Civ biased? Fine...

Thank you.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

(and it'd be a plus to read articles before dismissing them offhand).

I've read the NYer plenty of times to know where they're coming from. I admit that I've only ever read Civilization in the library... don't want to waste my money supporting either rag. You were clear in the positions the articles in question took and that coupled with my previous acquantance with those magazines was enough to have a general opinion. Sorry if I don't drop everything I'm doing to go read every articles cited... I'm quite sure that you don't go read every article I've cited either.

Yes I'm upset about adding insult to injury merely to test the power of a weapon. Our gov't voted that idea down as cruel--are you saying we should have gone for it?

Nice try... I merely stated that voting down the idea as cruel is a little, well, ludicrous given the fact that the purpose was to kill them.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

And yes you'd be upset if your family members were nuked. You wouldn't chalk it up to the nature of war.

Dead is dead. Nuked, stabbed, shot, beaten to death with a baseball bat, run over by a car... I've had relatives die in war... This little "conflict" that occurred 1/2 way around the world, I'd bet, before you were even born... and sorry to disappoint you, but... yep, that's the nature of war. It's aweful, it's tragic, it's disgusting, it's brutal, and it can take away those we love.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

And having nasty opponents in the Japanese military doesn't make civilian victims any more deserving of a nuclear fire.

Read Von Clausewitz... Read Sun Tzu... and realize that when an army loses the support of the people, they will lose the war. Deserving? No... no innocent civilian ever deserves being subjected to the horrors of war, but they have a term for it... it's called "collateral damage". I hate that euphemism, but the concept is valid, even if it is tragic.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

Great that you know about the acre. Kinda irrelevant if only one in a thousand could join you, you have to admit.

I don't think the fact that I happen to be one in a thousand that has a decent education and understands the units of measurement in common usage is irrelevant at all. In fact, I think it's rather sad.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

I'm sure the US is right about our archaic and memorization requiring system and the rest of the entire world is wrong.

Thank you.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

MY educational goal has always been learning to think and learning essentials, not packing away trivia when they could be looked up or when a better substitute exists.

You have no idea how tempting this is... But I'm playing nice. Must be tough when you have to talk with someone about how far away some place is... since you have to go look it up all the time...

Immigrants MAY learn the language... now it's mandatory? I don't follow.

Well that's obvious... I didn't say it was mandatory. Nothing's mandatory. But don't expect to get a job dealing with the general public if you can't deal with the general public. There are parts of Canada where, to get a decent job, you must be bilingual. And parts of Europe where it means being trilingual! (But not in France. )

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

I think if someone is going to complain about getting service in another language they should stick to english speaking areas.

I do... from sea-to-shining-sea...

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

free country.

Is it? But you don't want me to have the freedom to not wear a seatbelt or helmet? Hmmmmm...

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

spanish speaking communities do fine. Why waste time griping about their language?

I'm a little rusty, but...

No me estoy quejando sobre su lenguaje, esse'!

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

I'm glad you're laughing your a$$ off about the hectare thing. Maybe before you jump the gun you should wonder if it's a point about interconvertability or not. But nevermind.

ya gotta admit, it was pretty funny...

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

Your youthful, indoctrinated friend with the meaningless college degree is busy laughing his a$$ off about your supposed policy re: making it personal. LOL. Whew, that was a good one.

c'mon... lighten up, Ian. I caught you in a flub and had some fun with it. I truly apologize if it hurt your feelings.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

Maybe I'll get more respect in 13 days.

If you're referring to the tournament, let me assure you that I have nothing but the utmost respect for you as a poster and a martial artist. That doesn't mean we can't disagree, debate and argue over these things. Yes, I tweeked you and gave you a jab, but it wasn't meant to "dis" you. I apologize for making you feel that way.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

Instincts are useful when making a split second decision... but they're generally nonsense when applied casually to diet or almost anything else. Hey, man has an instinct to fight. Doesn't make it right. Does make for an absurd argument about eating meat.

Oh, idunno... maybe, maybe not... I still won't give up my steak or sushi. Am I gonna die? Most assuredly, it's just a matter of time... after all life is a terminal disease.

Penis envy. I guess they should change it from "PC" to "empathy." I doubt this is a welcoming thing for any women to see on a forum. It's insulting to their whole gender.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You know what's really funny about your response? It's the fact that I basically stole that sentiment from my sister! ROTFLMAO!

Regardless, I apologize to any of the women on the forum if they are offended by that... Although it seems that you're more sensitive to it than they are.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

I defer to climatologists for further discussion of global warming. I figure they have their reasons and they know more about it than I.

IMNSHO, it'd be nice if you'd take the same approach about some other subjects.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

I don't watch the visual toilet. How's this: "And especially don't point something that looks like a gun at them." Here's good advice, indeed.

Congrats...

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

But to characterize the kids who walk by the wrong place with a supersoaker or a milky way as a bunch of whiners...

Not guilty.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

...or to second guess their split second reaction when they hear a command from someone who could be anyone.

Well... Looking back on my original post, I must admit that is an error that I should correct. Actually, from the standpoint of a private citizen who is armed it is a non-issue, because the law doesn't allow private citizens to shoot someone who is fleeing except in extremely limited circumstances. From the standpoint of an LEO, they have only slightly more leeway in being able to shoot a fleeing suspect. So, basically it's a moot point and I'll just remember to delete it from my position in the future. (I'll leave it in the original here for historical and intellectual honesty reasons.)

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

well I don't think that's right. They got shot out of bad luck. Even if all the cops were perfect citizens, I don't think we need to imply the victim was to blame.

OK, I've addressed that...

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

Gore basically lost the election (and I didn't say he didn't) because a bunch of people voted for buchanan

Ummmm, I think he lost because a bunch of people voted for Bush...

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

or voted twice and were uncounted

Ummmm... You vote for X and Y and we're supposed to read your mind? I don't think so... One ballot can be turned into one valid vote... that's the way it works.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

or voted for him accidentally

This is a new one... never heard anyone claim that they voted for Bush accidentally. If you're talking about Buchanan when referring to these accidents, then why the previous complaints about Buchanan votes? because by definition, if these were the "accidental" ones, then those must be referring to ones that were "intentional".

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

and voided their ballots not knowing they could get another.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>The votes he lost would have put him as the winner by a clear margin. This is what I'm talking about. Not the count. WHICH votes were counted.

(snip)

I never said I wanted Gore to be president. He's not my socialist, utopian leader. I never gave indication he was.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

If you say so...

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

We have to go by the legitimate votes in the end. But we don't have to pretend that Bush would have won under a system that recorded voter intent with perfect fidelity.

Our country has set up a system of benefits and made a lot of investments for the automobile driver. To utilize them I say people should be asked to use them responsibly and not burden the system with the results of their stupidity.

If you are not free to choose wrongly and irresponsibly, you are not free at all.

<blockquote>The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire.--ROBERT A. HEINLEIN</blockquote>

it is painfully obvious which side of that desire we are each divided politically.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

You've got to have car insurance,

Not in all jurisdictions.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

a maintained car,

Not in all jurisdictions.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

proof that you can drive semi-well (a license),

Not in all jurisdictions.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

so you pose less of a threat. I would add a seatbelt on, or helmet, so you pose less of a financial threat.

How about outlawing bankrupcy? How about outlawing bad investments? Don't those pose a financial threat/burden?

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

Kids die when their parents don't belt them.

That's tragic, no doubt about it...

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

Other people die when cars or buses fly where guard rails could have prevented them from flying.

Yep... that's true.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

Where does all this fascination with personal responsibility get us when the person in question was in the back of a bus that rolled (any recent events come to mind, maybe in Canada?*) or is a mushed up kid with a stupid parent?

I wrote it in the "4th Amendment repealed" thread, I'll write it again FYI... It's not about safety! If it was, then they would have made seatbelts mandatory in buses years ago, but they still aren't! It is about control.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

Broken bodies are more important than ideology at that point. Much as I trust that the right to drive unfettered is vital to our liberty... belt laws make sense.

Extra points if you can tell me where in the Constitution you have the "right to drive"...

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

*in Canada the situation with the rolled bus, I understand, is that the curve was too sharp and this bus was only the latest vehicle to roll there. The parallel is, we can always say all these people drove too fast and therefore got hurt or died thru their own fault. I'd rather say we built a good road (gentle curve or guardrail) and never had to say it was their fault.

First off, there are lots of reasons that a road may or may not have the "gentle curve" you desire... The engineers have to take many things into consideration, from the lay of the land to the amount of area that is available to the costs of the project...

Second, you don't think it's right to say that they were going too fast, but the fact is that a bus or truck or car can make a right angle turn just fine if it's not going too fast. In this case, for this exit ramp, the driver was going too fast. he most certainly was exceeding the speed-limit for that exit... and now his personal responsibility will live with it for the rest of his life. (not counting other potential punishments) Look at the height of guardrails and look at the height of a tractor-trailor rig or tour bus... On a curve, such as the one in question, it may very well have helped the bus go over... who knows. Sometimes the answers just aren't as simple as you think they are... regardless of Occam's Razor.

I usually try to avoid replying to every word in a reply I get, because the result is endless arguing about semantics and a 3 METER post no one wants to read. But there are a few things I'd like to be specific about mixed in with my general reply:

1) "I know it sounds cold." Yep.

2) Columbine. My point was that talking to your kids doesn't protect them from school violence as much as you'd have us believe. You respond by baselessly implying, and rolling your eyes insultingly, that I think we shouldn't get involved with our kids. Nothing could be further from what I said.

3) You have a SECOND hand understanding of nuclear bombing. Not a big point, but, I think you'd call ME on it. I'll refrain from questioning your education or ROTFLMAO.

4) Hiroshima as a counter example... sigh. I explained clearly that destruction of cities had been shown not to stop wars: example, Dresden. Others in Japan. This fact is NOT in "dispute." Hiroshima and Nagasaki have not been shown to have ended the war; your statement that they did is what I said was "in dispute." They saved themselves from Russia, by surrendering; we didn't nescesarily help by nuking them. Clear enough?

5) I don't read all your article citations (and haven't claimed to) but I also don't dismiss them all without reading them.

6) Re: blinding japanese, if it's ludicrous to have voted down the idea, then you're for it. You'd have blinded a bunch of civilians for weapons research (and since light travels farther than the blast/fire, naturally, the idea they'd be dead anyway is just a distraction).

7) Thanks, but I already knew war was bad. My point remains that even if it's bad, there's no reason to dismiss concerns about improper force. And...so the bombings made Japan lose because they lost the support of the people? Where's the evidence for THAT?

8) My point about the english system is that it's failing our nation. (whether you want to blame education or not, the problem exists.) About the english system currently being in use... we could go to a dual system very easily. Then, we wouldn't be like Bethlehem Steel in my home town. They went with a steel pressing system "in common use" while the Japanese upgraded... now the entire city is full of empty plants and office buildings, because using terrible outdated systems instead of modern rational ones costs you in the end. Oh and re: distances to other places... I didn't say I had to look them all up... I said, clearly, I leave reference material to reference volumes. How far it is to important locations is obviously not among such topics.

9) 13 days from now I still will have entered zero tournaments, but I'll be an MD.

10) Your sister's viewpoint on penis envy reflects a few key points: one, she's a single data point. We don't know that has any relevance to what most women think reading this site. Two, we have no data on whether I'm more sensitive to it than they are. I might ust be the one who speaks up. wouldn't be the first time. Three, women reading this site, or others, may have gotten used to things they shouldn't have needed to get used to or represent a select group because women who cared gave up or never came.

11) Kids who got shot as "whiners..." You're not guilty of using that word, in a literal sense. You do know, or should know, that the tone of your initial post was a mocking of sympathy for such victims and an implication of their role in getting shot, and an unfair one, because they can't make good decisions without time to react. This tone seems to be deliberate--it makes no effort to express sympathy for the victims... a lot of people reading it would find that upsetting, as did I, as was, I believe, your intent: "no apologies." Uncompromising unsympathetic opinions. No?

12) Election snafu summary: if the ballot had been clear, and votes recorded with perfect fidelity, Gore would have won. We can't read the mind of people who voted twice but we can look at the ballot and make a sensible person's assessment of what they intended to do. There wasn't a random distribution of double votes.

13) "Pot, kettle, black..." Care to back this up?

14) Heinlein's quote and your accusation notwithstanding, the world is not as black and white as you make it out to be.

15) "How about outlawing bad investments? Don't those pose a financial threat/burden?" You'd have us believe the US financial system is totally unregulated?

16) "if you can tell me where in the Constitution you have the "right to drive"..." Are you saying (rather agreeing with my sarcasm) that we DON'T have a right to drive? Yet we DO have a right to drive unbelted? Fill me in.

17) As is the case many times in a debate like this, I cannot and should not would not will not address every single detail, of for example, road construction, for space reasons. I will submit that repeated accidents localized to the exact same spot point to a defect in the design not the users. Of course I know the lay of the land may impose restrictions on engineers, and its insulting for you to point that out, or imply that I thought life was super simple because I didn't fill in what I thought readers could supply on their own. Yes, constraints exist--but if there has to be a sharp turn there can be flashing lights, rumble strips, more signs, speedbumps if need be, and if multiple roll overs continue to occur this is evidence that the design is inadequate. Blaming the drivers is philosophical fun (for some) but it gets us broken and dead kids in the real world whereas a better design, or belt laws, or in parallel, better ballot machines get us a more pleasant outcome.

Fire away, but for space considerations, I resolve henceforth to concentrate my efforts on a few, if not zero, key points, and especially to threads on single topics.

Columbine. My point was that talking to your kids doesn't protect them from school violence as much as you'd have us believe.

First, you are the one that keeps tossing Columbine into this... not me. I was speaking to a much more general "feeling" that some parents seem to have... in no small part because the media sensationalizes some things.

Second, Your feeling as to how much protection I'm implying is your opinion. You read an awful lot into the statement that parents need to turn off the TV and get involved with their kids... Besides, getting involved is certainly going to afford more knowledge of a kid's situation than continuing to be oblivious while they sit and watch the tube.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

You respond by baselessly implying, and rolling your eyes insultingly, that I think we shouldn't get involved with our kids.

No... I didn't do the eyeroll to imply that you think we shouldn't get involved with our kids. I did the eyeroll because for all your bluster, you just don't get it.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

You have a SECOND hand understanding of nuclear bombing. Not a big point, but, I think you'd call ME on it. I'll refrain from questioning your education or ROTFLMAO.

S'OK... I musta missed that class in grad school. Let me look it up here in this handy reference book... Hmmmmm...

While I have a secondhand (received from or through an intermediary) knowledge of the horrors of nuclear war, I maintain that I have a firsthand (obtained by, coming from, or being direct personal observation or experience) understanding... based on the fact that I, personally, observed the results of the nuclear bombing on these victims... and gained my understanding from that observation. Question my education all you want... We all make mistakes and I'm no different.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

Clear enough?

Sure... If you want to debate clearly, you should perhaps be clearer...

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

I don't read all your article citations (and haven't claimed to) but I also don't dismiss them all without reading them.

That's nice to know... Gotta tell you that you coulda fooled me though... Regardless, I guess the same statements could be made going the other way.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

then you're for it. You'd have blinded a bunch of civilians for weapons research.

Careful... Now you're just twisting things to make me out as nastier than I already am. Your comments are incorrect.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

My point remains that even if it's bad, there's no reason to dismiss concerns about improper force.

I wasn't discussing war crimes (which I believe exist)... and if you are/were, then perhaps that is the difference. then again, it could just be that our definitions of what constitutes a war crime differ. My position is that the victors write the history, and therefore aren't seen as guilty of any war crime. But that wasn't really the point of my original statements.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

And...so the bombings made Japan lose because they lost the support of the people?

In part... yes.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

Where's the evidence for THAT?

The military was pressuring Hirohito to allow them to push on... After the enormous devastation of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the people of Japan quit supporting the military imperialism blindly and actually (through editorials and people speaking out) strongly urged the emperor to surrender. That can be read in more than a few history books and historical records.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

My point about the english system is that it's failing our nation. (whether you want to blame education or not, the problem exists.)

I disagree...

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

About the english system currently being in use... we could go to a dual system very easily.

Fine. You pay for all the bilingual signs. I don't want my tax money going for that.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

13 days from now I still will have entered zero tournaments, but I'll be an MD.

Oh. Thanks for the clarification. And Congradulations! That's a lot of hard work and I sincerely wish you and your future patients all the best.

You're correct that my sister is but a single data point... but I have three sisters and they all agree with the sentiment. Regardless, I apologize to any woman reading this thread who was offended by my use of the word "penis".

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

You do know, or should know, that the tone of your initial post was a mocking of sympathy for such victims and an implication of their role in getting shot...

I've already explained this once for you. I don't think I need to repeat myself.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

This tone seems to be deliberate--it makes no effort to express sympathy for the victims...

Yep... Deliberate.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

a lot of people reading it would find that upsetting, as did I, as was, I believe, your intent: "no apologies."

Too bad. Get over it...

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

Uncompromising unsympathetic opinions. No?

I'm not "unsympathetic"... Those that know me know that. You don't know me. However, I am "uncompromising". Especially when it comes to debating the misguided, modern liberal elitists who think they know what is better for [I}We, the People[/I] than We, the People do.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

Election snafu summary: if the ballot had been clear, and votes recorded with perfect fidelity, Gore would have won.

Wrong, wrong, wrong. The ballot was clear. It was the voters who were idiots that I was pointing to.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

"Pot, kettle, black..." Care to back this up?

Sure... You admonished me with the old "assume makes an..." statement. I replied with the "Pot, kettle..." statement to point out that while you think I'm "assuming" to much of what you say and mean, I fell that the reverse is also happening. I was pointing out that both of us are probably more than a little guilty of that. Don't worry... I think you're in good company.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

Heinlein's quote and your accusation notwithstanding, the world is not as black and white as you make it out to be.

I know that... Part of my rant/lament is the fact that it's not that black and white.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

You'd have us believe the US financial system is totally unregulated?

Not any different than you having us believe that car safety, bus safety, highway engineering for safety, (and while I'm at it I might as well toss in) gun product safety are unregulated...

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

"if you can tell me where in the Constitution you have the "right to drive"..." Are you saying (rather agreeing with my sarcasm) that we DON'T have a right to drive? Yet we DO have a right to drive unbelted? Fill me in.

I didn't think you'd get it... so I will fill you in... well... actually, I'll give you a hint. Yes, you do have a Right to drive... and it extends to a Right to drive either belted or unbelted! And it is in the Constitution... to narrow it down for you, it's even in the "Bill of Rights". beyond that, I won't spell it out for you.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

Of course I know the lay of the land may impose restrictions on engineers, and its insulting for you to point that out, or imply that I thought life was super simple because I didn't fill in what I thought readers could supply on their own.

Blaming the drivers is philosophical fun (for some) but it gets us broken and dead kids in the real world whereas a better design, or belt laws, or in parallel, better ballot machines get us a more pleasant outcome.

While you and those of your ilk continue to absolve everyone of personal responsibility, I (and those of my ilk) will continue to push for those responsible to be held accountable. Drive too fast, get in a wreak (it's not an "accident"... it's "negligence") and be held responsible. Take a perfectly good ballot, turn it into an invalid ballot (it's not a "vote" until it's properly transformed into a valid vote), you have no one to blame but yourself. (And sometimes ballot questions are worded in a confusing manner just to get the desired outcome... What that means is that voters need to be cautious and ever-vigilant)

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

Fire away, but for space considerations, I resolve henceforth to concentrate my efforts on a few, if not zero, key points, and especially to threads on single topics.

PREFACE: I am not a Democrat or Republican, but I do lean towards the sinister side of things (refresh your Latin to figure that one out!)

I am not anti-gun. In fact, I have the NRA Gun Safety manual, and as soon as I get off my soft, cushy "seat", I'll take the gun safety course I paid for and get a permit.

I have a keen interest in the natural sciences, as well as a cursory interest in history, but not as much as some other people on this forum.

I'm not wanting to argue, but perhaps throw out another perspective.

That being said....

China can rot. So can those Japanese (but not ALL Japanese) who want an apology 'cause we nuked them. The families of the Pearl Harbor victims, the Battan Death March victims, the Rape of Nanking victims probably could use some consideration as well. Those events (except maybe for Pearl Harbor) were legitimatly evil.

Why can't someone be a good Boy Scout, soldier, Gov't official, etc. and be gay?

The Metric system is a vastly more efficient system of measurement than the archaic English system. The English system is an old, esoteric method whose inception defied all semblance of proper and well-thought out engineering. The units do not even make sense in relation to each other! With the Metric system, we can go from one unit to the other easily, and even go from one type to another without too much effort. Convert gallons to cubic inches easily. Now, convert liters to cubic centimeters. The later is much easier, even if you do know how many cubic inches in a gallon.

Some of the moviest and shakiest people who ever walked the planet came from means. So I don't agree with "In fact, if your parents are footing the bill to put your pansy @$$ through 4-7 years of liberal indoctrination commonly referred to as "college", you haven't begun to be enlightened.". And just because I didn't attend the school of hard knocks doesnt' make me more or less knowledgable than anyone else.

There are alternatives to the liberal colleges out there. Bob Jones U., Liberty U., Oral Roberts U. are some examples I can think of.

Did you know that the cats' canine teeth evolved so they can easily sever their prey's spinal column? Just thought you might like to know...

The experts on Global Warming were at the North Pole, trying to figure out why the Polar Ice Cap at the North Pole MELTED THROUGH.

"I haven't been persecuted by the Turks... and neither have you, so shut-up already."

My next door neighbor is an 84 y.o. woman. When I'm 84, I want to be as free-spirited, flighty and well liked as her. She is one jazzy old woman! She is also a survivor of the Armenian Holocaust. Do I tell her to shut up when she calls the Turks a bunch of godless savages? Just because I'm lucky enough live in an age and a land where those kinds of things don't happen, doesn't mean I turn a deaf ear to those that bear witness to man's inhumanity to man. Maybe I can use her experience to vicariously prevent the same thing from happening again.

Prostitution may be a victimless crime individually, but look at it as a whole. Many of the women become drug abusers, they become infected with communicable disease and they become pregnant with unwanted children. Prostitution, I think (remember, not for an arguement), also further teaches men that women are pelts to be collected.

Remember Kip Kinkle? He's the kid who killed his family, then shot up that school in Oregon. He was a known discipline problem, but his father thought teaching him the discipline of how to use and care for firearms would help him. Here is a case that access to gun(s) DID turn Kip into a murderer. Maybe he would have evntually killed without the gun, but who knows?

Again, I AM NOT ANTI-GUN!! I would have even attended the fun-shoot last weekend, but Van-Sensei recommended no novices.

Recent Census figure show that people whose skin color is other than white are on a dramatic population rise. Just as immigrants must learn English to get along in the US, why can't us monolingual Americans learn another language, in addition to English?

As for me, I just hate "Creation Science". What a crock!!

Just may meandering, non-arguementative, thoughts.

Pnther, will you be at the Tournament? How 'bout you, Ian?

Gene

[This message has been edited by Gene DeMambro (edited May 08, 2001).]

Everything else has been rehashed enough and the people reading it have long ago made up their minds about whether they think it's better to, for example, point to a rolled bus with broken kids and decide to prevent the next crash by a) doing something concrete or b) just by letting future crashees they're to be held responsible for the injuries they and their charges suffer.

But the above quote deserves a comment.

I brought up my graduation after you decided to attack ME and not my arguments. You do it ALL the time. Enough to where I wonder where the topic of debate is the topic, or me. YOU are the one who calls your opponents peons--as well as stereotyping anyone who differs from you as a well-trained statist, and positing yourself as the "patriot" as if everyone that disagrees with you hates their country. Like calling someone anti-choice or pro-death in lieu of making a legitimate argument, that's a farce.

But to pretend my bid for a little respect--a REACTION to some rude attack-the-messenger tactics--was an attempt to talk down to anyone... well that's a FARCE.

Why can't someone be a good Boy Scout, soldier, Gov't official, etc. and be gay?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Never said they couldn't be. But the Boy Scouts is a private organization and should have every right to make whatever rules it wants to regarding who can or can't work with the scouts. But, in reality, I was referring to a case where a family sued (lost) the boy scouts for not letting their daughter in... not the other issue.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

The Metric system is a vastly more efficient system of measurement than the archaic English system.

Yep... Never said otherwise...

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

I don't agree with "In fact, if your parents are footing the bill to put your pansy @$$ through 4-7 years of liberal indoctrination commonly referred to as "college", you haven't begun to be enlightened.". And just because I didn't attend the school of hard knocks doesnt' make me more or less knowledgable than anyone else.

That's the whole point of that particular paragraph... the point being that just because you're going to college doesn't make you more or less knowledgable than anyone else and the fact that the ones that (usually) feel that they are more enlightened than everyone else are (almost always, but there's always exceptions) the ones who's parents are footing the bill...

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

There are alternatives to the liberal colleges out there. Bob Jones U., Liberty U., Oral Roberts U. are some examples I can think of.

True enough, but don't think for a second that I'm enamoured of any of those institutions either! Each has their own agenda and I just wish schools would learn to do their teaching without doing all the preaching.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

Did you know that the cats' canine teeth evolved so they can easily sever their prey's spinal column? Just thought you might like to know...

That is really neat! KEWL! Thank you!

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

The experts on Global Warming were at the North Pole, trying to figure out why the Polar Ice Cap at the North Pole MELTED THROUGH.

I haven't measured... have the oceans risen? I just don't see where having the annual mean temperature rise by less than 1/2 a degree over the last 150 years constitutes the big crisis that is being sensationalized. I also don't see how humans can be blamed for everything, when there are so many other (and in most cases, natural) "polluters".

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>"I haven't been persecuted by the Turks... and neither have you, so shut-up already."

My next door neighbor is an 84 y.o. woman. When I'm 84, I want to be as free-spirited, flighty and well liked as her. She is one jazzy old woman! She is also a survivor of the Armenian Holocaust. Do I tell her to shut up when she calls the Turks a bunch of godless savages? Just because I'm lucky enough live in an age and a land where those kinds of things don't happen, doesn't mean I turn a deaf ear to those that bear witness to man's inhumanity to man. Maybe I can use her experience to vicariously prevent the same thing from happening again.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

(I left the entire paragraph intact, because it's very poignant...)

I completely agree with the last sentence. The original post as quoted wasn't addressed to actual survivors of the many, many government holocausts that have occurred. It was specifically meant to address all those who are complaining (and seeking "compensation") for things that never happened to them... And to point out that, given the fact that I don't condone and wasn't responsible for the heinous things that happened to their racial ancestors, I don't feel any need or desire to apologize... and especially not the need or desire to be forced into paying restitution!

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

Prostitution may be a victimless crime individually, but look at it as a whole. Many of the women become drug abusers,

So.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

they become infected with communicable disease

So.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

and they become pregnant with unwanted children.

So.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

Prostitution, I think (remember, not for an arguement), also further teaches men that women are pelts to be collected.

Not exactly... While I agree that the use of seat belts, motorcycle helmets, driving safely (not necessarily slower, that's a myth), not taking drugs recreationally, not practicing unsafe sexual habits, not smoking and keeping your car in proper working order all make Epidemiologic "good sense".

However, I maintain (always have and always will) that it is not your, the gopvernment's, or anyone else's place/right/business to require/regulate/enforce those actions.

Using the same logic, we could just as easily add that all martial arts must be conducted from a distance of at least 10 fee... meters to prevent accidental injuries. And that only soft rubber devices can be used in the practice of martial arts. And that all participants (even given the 10 meter rule) must wear full body padding. Not me, thanks...

I will always chose Personal Freedom over your, government's or anyone else's intrusion.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

Here is a case that access to gun(s) DID turn Kip into a murderer.

No effin' way... he was a murderer period... the tool that he chose to carry out his mayhem is completely irrelevant.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

Again, I AM NOT ANTI-GUN!! I would have even attended the fun-shoot last weekend, but Van-Sensei recommended no novices.

Maybe next time... and then you can see what it's all about and find out that you've been lied to by the popular propaganda.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

Recent Census figure show that people whose skin color is other than white are on a dramatic population rise.

Yep... I believe that "immigrants" have been on the rise since the Mayflower.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

Just as immigrants must learn English to get along in the US, why can't us monolingual Americans learn another language, in addition to English?

And (AFAIK) the learning of a second language is a requirement for graduation from secondary school in just about every State. Not a problem. I've learn a handful myself (and forgot most of it... ) In fact, you're making the same point I was making... only for a different group. In your case, you think that we should be accomodating to immigrants by learning a second language. (Creole perhaps? ) In my case, I think that immigrants who want to come and take advantage of all the wonders this country has to offer should be the ones that accomodate themselves by learning the prevalent language in use.

Here's one for you:

What do you call someone who speaks three languages?

Tri-lingual.

What do you call someone who speaks two languages?

Bilingual.

What do you call someone who speaks only one language?

American!

Heard that one in Europe... the funniest thing was that the person who told it was French and proceeded to really take a ragging from the Swiss and Italians because of the fact that so many French people refuse to learn a second language!

If you don't want to pay for the crack whore bastards, then let's prevent the crack whores from ever coming into being. An ounce of prevention...

Disagree. I didn't say I wanted to stop her from having bastards, doing crack, or being a whore. I just said that I didn't want to pay for it... Placing the burden for her life on her own personal responsibility for the actions she takes and the decisions she makes... and leaving her free to continue to make bad decisions.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

There are un-elightened people on both sides of the economic and intelligence spectrum.

Very true.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

They also ex-communicated men who did not engage in intercourse with their wives

I was going to ask where I sign up, but then I remembered the way things were back then and... well... nevermind.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

And until the Bill of Rights was adopted, Jews and Catholics were prohibited from holding public office in Massachusetts...

The history of Massachusetts Bay Colony again rises to infamy...

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote

Quote:

What do the rest of us do when the prevalent language in use becomes something other than English?

Won't happen. Even with the enormous rise in "minorities" (why is it that 51% of the population consists of women, but they're considered a "minority"?) in this country, they still aren't anywhere near "taking over". I didn't mean to imply that they were... or that it would necessarily be a bad thing. OTOH, only part of all those minorities makes up a large group that only speaks another language. The predominant language in this country is English and will remain so for the forseeable future. Does that mean that I'm against learning other languages? No... I've learn Spanish, Japanese, Chinese and a little of a few others in my life. I was considered "fluent" in more than one... I can't even speak English correctly half the time now!

I've enjoyed this thread,started out as a position statement from the cat,and now has evolved into this huge post. I am hoping thatit will not die as parties bicker about insult and intent. When one debates issues that are core personal values, feathers tend to get ruffled. We must remember that the posts of the presenters are not personal attacks but personal opinions,I have not read anything that I viewed as insulting or off base in any personal manner. Just my slant from the outside looking in.

And now a few other off the cuff opinions:

1. The old British system of measurement makes about as much sense as the English language. Before too many folk jump on the old metric conversion band wagon take a closer look at nations that have.

Canada bit the bullet and went metric a few years ago....30 to 35 not sure of the year.

Well millions upon millions of tax dollars later and we are still not there.

Being a dinosaur I know both systems. We were posted to Europe in the early sixties so had to learn metric to function. Posted back to Canada and then the country converted .My kids however only know the metric system,The old imperial system or the other one are no longer taught.

The other one? America operates on a system that has 128 oz. in a gallon,32oz in a qt. and 2-16 oz pints in a quart and 4-8 oz cups in a quart.

Canada and the rest of the Commonwealth however embraced a slightly different system. A gallon always had 160 ounces. thus a quart would be 40 ounces a pint was 16 and a cup 8.

We changed every highway sign to kilometres in this country. If my kids drive a car with an odometer made in the states they don't know how fast they are driving and get pulled over for speeding. The old mile a minute thing doesn't work on the highway anymore. Are we their yet? How much longer?

In the good old days 60 mph, sign says 240 miles to destination,4 hours kids. Today 90 kilometers per hour 400 kilometers to go,hey kids that will be 4.44444 hours.

Metric conversion really messes up a lot of stuff. We still build houses with eight foot ceilings in Canada, but we use studs that are 2.443 metres of something silly.

When a chef orders a case of canned tomatoes instead of requesting 1 case of 6 by 100 oz tomatoes it's 1 case 6 by 2.84litres . The can size and stud size never changed just the method of measurement.

Other products did change,ie old days qt of scotch= 40oz today 1 liter (35.2 oz) price remained constant. We have to pay for retooling the plant you know. We also know have the old 750 ml bottle,a 26 ouncer to us old folk. The bottom line is as portion sizes dropped prices didn't most manufactures discovered this was a great opportunity for profit taking.

Today any restaurant operating still cuts steaks at 6,8 and 16 oz. We still buy scales manufactured in the USA. Salesmen still quote meat prices per pound because that's how the industry operates. The invoice may charge for X kilograms @ 22.99/kilo, And the menu may say 168 gram sirloin or 225gram new york, but it's still the old 6 or 8 ounce steak.

Britain has decided to get out of the old British sterling monetary system(Pounds,half pence thrup pence pennies shillings, a great way to rip off the tourist mate!)They now use a system based on 100 just like America!But old habits die hard, They still report the weight of their fighters in stones."in this corner weighing in at 8.9 stone is......know tell me am I climbing thru the ropes to go head to head with a middle weight or a super heavy weight

2. Highway mortality, would be nice to live in an idealistic world wear I could say that if we built them properly no one would die on them. But I don't,the main reason people die on our road ways is driving too fast for conditions(99%of the time).No I haven't spent a dozen years studying road engineering,but I do operate a transportation company. I also have spent years operating heavy equipment and plows on the mountain roadways.Ask a cop, an ambulance driver, a tow truck driver,or the flag man that directed traffic while the bodies are scraped off the road and they will all tell you,adjust your driving to road conditions or die. That means when the sign says 100k/hr(60 mph)and the road is covered in snow and ice......slow down or die. Rain....fog.......heavy traffic.....bald tires.....hauling a trailer.....adjust for conditions.

When you enter that hair pin turn @ 60 mph your not speeding, some road signs are only cautionary.But when you ignore them you may be risking your life,I don't care just try not to take me or my family with you.Highway mortality is not about belts it's about reacting too conditions.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum